« Kerry Ad Buy Hints at Battleground Locations | Main | Sesame Street Polling »
Thursday, September 02, 2004
Convention Open Thread
Posted by DavidNYCI don't even have a TV at the moment, so I couldn't watch Bush's speech even if I wanted to. Not that I want to. But this is the moment we've all been waiting for: the final two months of the campaign, the post-conventions, post-Labor Day season. Stay involved, give money, give time - and push your family and friends to do the same. And if you have any thoughts on the convention, or what the homestretch will look like from here on out, share `em here.
Posted at 10:31 PM in General | Technorati
Comments
Mother Nature does not appear to be cooperating with Bush's dreams of a post-convention bounce. Hurricane Frances is likely to dominate the headlines already tomorrow night, bumping Bush to the secondary story and keeping commentators from spending too much time either singing the speech's praises or criticizing it. CBS News analysts were not overly impressed immediately after Bush finished (FINALLY!!), and usually if there is to be any kind of buzz at all, it happens immediately following the speech. I didn't hear any other analysis of the speech but am hopeful others found it as underwhelming as CBS did.
Ultimately, the speech is probably going to go over well in the red states, thus not helping Bush much. I'm never a very good judge of these things though, so I guess we'll have to let time be the judge.
Posted by: Mark at September 2, 2004 11:51 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Mark:
I agree with you consuming the Hurricane. The Hurricane's domination will probably trim at least a point or two from the bounce. I guess bad timing. I do not know about other networks, but Chris Wallace (FoxNews) spoke higly of the speech.
Posted by: David at September 3, 2004 12:05 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Correction; In above message it should be concerning not consuming. It has been a long week.
Posted by: David at September 3, 2004 12:09 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I fear that some people here have a hard time taking an objective view. I think Bush's speech, in its tenor, content and especially delivery was actually better than Kerry's (which left me unimpressed). I think he will get a decent bounce from it. HOWEVER, the speech was largely about the fortitude and decency of the American people. He said little about policy.
If I heard him correctly, he said we need to let companies offer more flextime and to let small business buy health insurance at the same discounts as large firms. Sounds good but the fact is that these things happen -- small firms can join collective bargaining groups for insurance and firms DO offer flex-time.
I think it's the kind of speech that will leave people with a good feeling. But because it did lack substance (as did Kerry's), any effect will be short-lived. But Kerry could learn a few things from this speech, like having a sense of humor [geez, I wish Edwards or Dean were the candidate].
Just one more thing about the convention: thank GOD that Zell Miller delivered a disasterous speech and came across as a grumpy old sourpuss, because a Democrat that endorsed Clinton speaking on behalf of Bush could have been very effective.
Anyway, sorry to ramble. Here's what I think we should watch as a clue to who will win:
- Tomorrow's employment report
- The stock market
- Energy prices
(don't underestimate the idea that people vote with their wallets!)
- Whom The Economist (magazine) endorses; I think a LOT of the more educated swing voters read it and hold it in fairly high esteem. Also I think it reflects the views of these swing voters. [In particular, I'm thinking of states like Colorado, Florida & Virginia]
- Whether Kerry moves more to the center and shows he's not a knee-kerk liberal.
The sad fact, in my opinion, is that W just comes across as a lot more honest likeable than Kerry (or Gore) and Kerry has to do something to defuse this. [Note that I said COMES ACROSS AS]
Of course this is my opinion and I'm no expert on predicting elections. I just don't want anyone to lose sleep if Bush gets a brief bounce & goes up by 3-4 nationally and in the swing states!
Posted by: Jason at September 3, 2004 01:14 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Knee-Kerk??? I assume you meant jerk but that actually sounds like a cool word.
I think the hurricane will draw attention away from Bush...BUT if Bush plays his cards right it could give him a big boost in FL. Kerry doesn't have the same luxury and will only be helped by a Bush F-up. If that happens, I got to say W is the luckiest SOB on the planet. Ultimately, he would be going down in a record defeat if 9-11 hadn't happened. And now he has been given two disasters and the opportunity to benefit the state and act presidential in the most important swing state. That damn Halliburton weather machine ;-)
Posted by: Michael at September 3, 2004 01:45 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Jason:
I don't see Virginia going Democrat this year. Also, are you hoping the market tanks, energy prices increase and a lackluster job report? Personally, I hope we have a good job report since it means more people are going back to work and the market increase...my 401(k) could use a nice increase.
Posted by: David at September 3, 2004 01:50 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I have to say that the GOP convention was the best thing that could have happened to the Democrats.
Partisan hacks turned off regular viewers, progressive 527s ran ads against Bush, protesters stole some thunder, Bush's daughters earned the scorn of many, Zell Miller imploded, a hurricane will steal the bounce and Kerry rapidly responded to GOP propaganda with his own attacks.
This convention was quite successful! I feel more confident of a Kerry win now than I ever did before.
Posted by: Robert Marlye at September 3, 2004 11:11 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
It strikes me that John Kerry's primary opponent in this campaign is not George Bush, but his own handlers. After questionable ad buys dismissing most of the Southern pink states that Kerry can't afford to ignore, he is now responding to a week of GOP smears by suggesting Dick Cheney is unqualified for office because of his Vietnam deferments.
In no way can I see this working. First of all, it shows that elephants have Kerry flustered. While he's wise to respond to attacks swiftly, one must at least measure their timing so as not to fall into the "saying something you regret out of anger" trap. He runs the risk of having one of Clinton's table-pounding "No! No! No! No!" moments, which will not be to his benefit. Secondly, we're a nation of flag-waving chickenhawks, meaning Cheney will probably get the public's sympathy if he's branded as cowardly. Lastly, it plays into the hands of the charge that Kerry wants to make this race about Vietnam and Vietnam alone. I certainly hope I'm wrong, but I'm not expecting Kerry to get much leverage out of trying to out-Zell Zell.
Posted by: Mark at September 3, 2004 12:55 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
It strikes me that John Kerry's primary opponent in this campaign is not George Bush, but his own handlers. After questionable ad buys dismissing most of the Southern pink states that Kerry can't afford to ignore, he is now responding to a week of GOP smears by suggesting Dick Cheney is unqualified for office because of his Vietnam deferments.
In no way can I see this working. First of all, it shows that elephants have Kerry flustered. While he's wise to respond to attacks swiftly, one must at least measure their timing so as not to fall into the "saying something you regret out of anger" trap. He runs the risk of having one of Clinton's table-pounding "No! No! No! No!" moments, which will not be to his benefit. Secondly, we're a nation of flag-waving chickenhawks, meaning Cheney will probably get the public's sympathy if he's branded as cowardly. Lastly, it plays into the hands of the charge that Kerry wants to make this race about Vietnam and Vietnam alone. I certainly hope I'm wrong, but I'm not expecting Kerry to get much leverage out of trying to out-Zell Zell.
Posted by: Mark at September 3, 2004 12:57 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Mark, The Cheney quip wasn't made out of anger. It was a prepared speech. Think about this carefully. If Kerry cameout two months ago and started attacking Bush and Cheney for dodging Vietnam he would have been labeled as unfair and elitist. But, now, having asked Bush repeatedly to denounce the Swift Boat ads and making the connection with the public that Bush is tied to those ads it is open season.
Why is that desireable? Because lets face it, it says a lot about Bush and Cheney. They weren't draft dodgers in principle or anything. They were spoiled children who used their wealthy status to evade the war (and in W's case then went AWOL). That is something that the Kerry campaign wants out there. And now that Cheney and Bush have come after Kerry all negative and everything it is open season from most standpoints. They still ahve to tread carefully but I see no real risks in what he said last night.
Posted by: seamus at September 3, 2004 01:21 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
As for Bush's speach, I thought he did a fairly good job in presenting himself, but the few details he did go into could trip him up. (Ex: Britain has tried something similar to private Social Security accounts and found them to provide a lower rate of return due to higher overhead.) There was an excellent article in The New Republic recently discussing comparisons to the 1980 election. The Bush team is largely making the same mistakes as Carter did, Kerry just needs to try and stay above the fray and jokingly brush off the attacks while others confront the Republican's message.
Posted by: joe at September 3, 2004 01:27 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
i actually thought that bush gave a pretty good speech.he is obviously bored by domestic policy but he gets really animated by war.i think kerry will sink himself, he just seems like his own worst enemy.the republicans have a way of presenting themselves as moderates once every 4 years and it gets them elected.
Posted by: jeremy at September 3, 2004 03:38 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Is an 11 point lead surmountable?
http://www.time.com/time/press_releases/article/0,8599,692562,00.html
Perhaps. But I believe it will take a much
better politician that Kerry has shown to be.
At least so far.
Posted by: pragmatist at September 3, 2004 04:08 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
That 11 point lead is complete BS. The numbers I have seen show that 44% are for Kerry 44% are for Bush and there is NO WAY that Kerry lost 3% of his solid support. Must have been a horribly bad sample. Zogby has a more realistic poll I think that shows Bush 2 points up.
Posted by: David Trinh at September 3, 2004 04:45 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Bush must be the luckiest man on the planet in more ways than one. The hurricanes in Florida only help him look more presidential--they certainly don't hurt him in the least. It looks like Bush is getting a larger post-convention bounce than Kerry, and people I'm talking to (all Democrats) are concerned that Bush is gaining momentum. Now Kerry is looking weak in the Upper Midwestern states of IO, MN, and especially WI, where nearly 30 EVs are at stake. It makes the likely Kerry pick up of NH and perhaps NV meaningless.
The perceived negatives about Kerry are ostensibly beginning to stick with voters who still haven't made up their mind. By the way, how on earth can it be that there are still undecided voters in this election? Give me a break!
It appears that the Swift Boat ads have harmed Kerry far more than Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 film did Bush. In fact, I'm beginning to wonder if Michael Moore might not be a Democratic albatross. He may very well be responsible for frightening and disgusting moderate voters into voting for Bush, yet Kerry can't dare criticize or dismiss him without great risk. Personally, I liked Fahrenheit 9/11, but did it make many converts, or was it rather preaching to the choir?
I'm growing pessimistic, though I don't think it's hopeless yet. Kerry is going to have to kick some ass in the debates, though, or I think we're going to have to endure another 4 years of Bush.
Posted by: Pepe at September 3, 2004 06:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I think that Bush is extremley unlucky. Not only will this hurricane and Clinton cancel out any coverage of his post convention travels, but John Kerry is finally coming alive. Those attacks on his patriotism awakened a sleeping giant.
Posted by: David Trinh at September 3, 2004 06:55 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I think that Time poll is pie in the sky. Bush is probably up by a few points. I keep saying that the debates will make or break both campaigns and i'm sticking to that assessment.
Posted by: Allan Bartlett at September 3, 2004 07:21 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I have a hard time believing Americans went from being evenly split yesterday to overwhelmingly wanting Bush today...it just seems a little unlikely to me.
Either someone from the Bush administration payed off that pollster, or that poll was conducted in Kansas.
Posted by: Nathaniel at September 3, 2004 08:26 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I think Hurricane Frances, President Clinton's pending heart surgery and the school crisis in Belsan, Russia (now found to be islamic terrorists) does more to bump John Kerry off the radar screen then it does President Bush.
Posted by: webgirl at September 3, 2004 09:13 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
The Time poll is a definite abberation: Zogby and ARG show him up 1-2%, and this is likely his bounce.
Zell Miller and Cheney may well be a gift to the dems, in that they are so scary and polarizing. The Bush speech didn't seem all that bad, but with it so slim on specifics, I don't think it was the terrific speech he needed to make.
News cycle is not breaking for Bush with the hurricanes, Clinton's heart attack, and that ghastly hostage situation in Russia.
Also see that Kerry is coming back swinging. I think he's right to call upon Cheney's fitness. And do not underestimate him as a campaigner when it gets to crunch time. He did a masterful job on William Weld in 1996, not to mention coming back from a near death experience of being down 30 points to Howard Dean in NH, back in December. When he gets into "A" mode, there is no better candidate, and I think he's come back on line.
Not to mention the fact that there are a lot of charged-up dems out there that *badly* want to win this race. They are not going to melt away. Not this year.
Posted by: Gus at September 3, 2004 10:37 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Not really because if none of these events would have happened the media would spend the next few days talking about Bush's bounce and his message.
Posted by: David Trinh at September 3, 2004 10:38 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
AP: Struggling Nader still dogs Democrats
Covers the swing states that Nader's managed to get on the ballot on. Says that Nader's likely to make it on MN (noooo!), NH, and WI.
Remember, if you see a Nader petitioner, pretend to sign the petition, then steal the clipboard and run! ;)
Posted by: Luke Francl at September 3, 2004 11:06 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Even so, Bush's messages stays clearer as the news comes out the terrorists were Islamic. Many evening programs tonight, along with talking about his 'bounce' also discussed (about the school) "could they do that here?". Kerry gets bumped for a few days.
Posted by: webgirl at September 3, 2004 11:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Even so, Bush's messages stays clearer as the news comes out the terrorists were Islamic. Many evening programs tonight, along with talking about his 'bounce' also discussed (about the school) "could they do that here?". Kerry gets bumped for a few days.
Posted by: webgirl at September 3, 2004 11:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Sorry about the duplicate posts! I was receiving error messages that they didn't go through :-)
Posted by: webgirl at September 3, 2004 11:27 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I have a few choice words for people who tell me it's all over: they're here.
Posted by: Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) at September 4, 2004 02:03 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I agree the bounce will not be that much. In the Time Poll taken during the RNC that I saw only had Bush up by about 11 points.
Posted by: Howie at September 4, 2004 04:42 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
It's looking worse, and Kerry has been all but invisible since before the GOP Convention. Why on earth was he having a rally in Ohio at midnight after the convention, which meant it got virtually no coverage?
Meanwhile, the horrific terrorist events in that Russian school, Hurricane Frances in Florida and the SE, and now Clinton's health are keeping him even further off the news headlines. Furthermore, Clinton's health means he will, obviously, not be doing any campaigning for Kerry in the few Southern States that some here actually believe could swing for Kerry in November.
I don't think Bush got an 11-point bounce, but I do believe it's much more than one or two points. Most everyone I've talked to "feel" that something has happened over the past few weeks, and the momentum has definitely shifted from Kerry to Bush. I have Democratic friends here in NC as well as in NYC and Chicago, and we're all extremely depressed, feeling like we're witnessing a Kerry free fall in slow motion. Is it possible to feel highly optimisitc about a Kerry-Edwards victory in November? I felt this was Kerry's election to lose, and he doesn't seem to be doing much to win it.
Posted by: pepe at September 4, 2004 08:13 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Pepe:
The Hurricane may be good for the president in the short-term. However, I am sure the Florida economy will suffer from it. The voters won't remember what caused the slow down in the economy.
Posted by: David at September 4, 2004 09:01 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
So you honestly think the voters will blame Hurricane Frances on George Bush? I know that much of the American electorate is as stupid as Michael Moore has told the Europeans, but I honestly don't think we're that stupid, David! The FL economy has been booming over the past four years, and most Floridians will realize that any economic difficulties created after the hurricane(s) are caused by acts of nature. What they will remember is how Bush rushes lots of aid and $$$ sans delay in order to help them towards a swift and speedy recovery. He'll look very presidential as well as greatly concerned about their welfare. Obviously, none of this helps Kerry, who better reverse his downward spiral soon.
Posted by: Pepe at September 4, 2004 09:13 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
The point of this is that Bush lost all his post convention media coverage which by any standards is a good thing.
Posted by: David Trinh at September 4, 2004 10:47 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Except that the networks are showing lots of Bush, and today CBS was airing the Time poll showing Bush with a sudden 11-point lead in the race. I don't know what your news sources are, David, but Bush has most definitely not "lost all of his post-Convention coverage"--far from it, I'm afraid. Meanwhile, it's almost as if Kerry is invisible during all of this.
Posted by: Pepe at September 4, 2004 11:02 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I agree with some others that the poll showing Bush up by 11% is nonsense -- one person wrote that it was taken during the Republican National Convention; maybe it was really taken AT the Republican National Convention.
I'd be interested in seeing, though, people's opinions about which state polls just "seem wrong" -- we know that different pollsters' methods get differing (and often biased) results, and I think there is some additional information carried by people who follow polls as to what the numbers "should be," regardless of the latest poll information.
So, using the spreadsheet from http://www.electoral-vote.com/ (I can't give the link to the spreadsheet itself because they rename it all the time), what state results do people think are the most out of whack?
My picks:
PA: Bush 47; Kerry 46 (Strategic Vision 8/28)
PA went for Gore by 4%; it went for Clinton twice; and it had been showing Kerry up by about 7% AFTER extensive GOP campaigning there. I expect that we'll be seeing polls showing at least a 3-4% Kerry lead in PA soon.
OH: Bush 48; Kerry 42 (Strategic Vision 8/28)
I expect that Bush is ahead in OH, and will probably win it as he did in 2000. But not by 6% -- 4% would be on the high side, I think.
TN: Bush 48; Kerry 50 (Zogby 8/21)
TN voted against its native son in 2000 by 4%, and had been polling about an 8% Bush lead there. Unless there's something specific going on that I don't know about -- maybe a disproportionate percentage of Iraq casualties are from TN-based units? -- I don't buy a Kerry lead there.
WI: Bush 45; Kerry 49 (Lake Snell Perry 8/29)
I think Kerry is likely ahead in WI, but only by a very thin margin; not 4%.
I also think the OR and WA polls show more Kerry strength than is really there, but that the differences aren't enough to throw the outcome into too much question.
Posted by: Marsden at September 4, 2004 11:46 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
After questionable ad buys dismissing most of the Southern pink states that Kerry can't afford to ignore....
What states did you have in mind, Mark? Kerry's advertised in LA, AR, NC, VA & FL. (He's also advertised in MO & WV, of course, but those don't really count as "Southern.") There aren't any other states in the South he has a decent chance at winning. I suppose you could make an argument for TN, but beyond that, there's bupkes.
GA? Not this election cycle. SC? Despite the huge job losses in the manufacturing sector, Bush still has twenty-point leads here. KY? Ben Chandler's race non-withstanding, this state is increasingly GOP. After that, all you've got is AL and MS. Good luck!
The bottom line is that Kerry has been competing in five Southern states. There are only 11 total. (I'm leaving out TX, which is a unique creature.) For a Democrat hampered by the media's spin of "Massachusetts liberal," I think Kerry's been about as aggressive in the South as we have any reason to expect.
Posted by: DavidNYC at September 4, 2004 12:41 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Guys (and Ladies), I hate to say I told you so, but so far it looks like Bush is getting a pretty big bounce from the Convention. I would loke to see how the polls are after the long weekend, but so far they good for Bush.
There is always Giliani versus Edwards in 2008.
Posted by: Howie at September 4, 2004 02:52 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Wasn't Gore up by 10-15% after the convention?
Howie,
Nah, Rudy needs something bigger...I think it will McCain in 2008 vs Edwards or Hillary...
I can see a McCain/Guilliani ticket (especially if Hillary got the nod) since he wouldn't need to appease the far right, because there is no way in Hell they would vote for a Clinton. I would rather see that than some other possibilities...even if I didn't vote for it, I'd feel more comfortable with that ticket than a Bush/Cheney-esque ticket.
Posted by: Michael at September 4, 2004 03:30 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Uh... in 2008 it'll be Kerry-Edwards vs. somebody, guys.
You've got to stop this negative thinking.
Posted by: Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) at September 4, 2004 05:03 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Good for you, Ed. All this relentless garbage from Pepe or Howie doesn't help at all.
Posted by: Inkan1969 at September 4, 2004 07:39 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
This appears to be an instant replay of the 2000 presidential election to me. Given pollsters site hugh leads for Bush, the public thinks he is a winner and the election ends up with brother Bush having to wheel and deal in Florida. Are we going to fall for this confidence game again?
Oh yeah, let me also be the first to inform you that, "Bush wins the debates". Why? Because their is no objectivity involved so the good ole boys / Fox gives it to Bush!
Posted by: Barbs at September 4, 2004 08:55 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Face it guys and gals, the mainstream media supports Bush. Let's do our job and boycott the media!
I wish Kerry was running his campaign like Clinton/Gore did in 1992. The Clinton strategists were masters. When Clinton ran into problems with the media, he went on Arsenio Hall and played his saxophone. Those were the days!
Clinton charmed, smiled, persevered, and never gave up. The Democrats have two exceptional candidates who are so much better than Bush and Cheney.
Posted by: Shar at September 5, 2004 04:32 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Um, when did John Kerry "give up", Shar?
Posted by: Inkan1969 at September 5, 2004 04:38 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
OOPS!!!! Sorry, ED...I was just looking at Howie's post and noth thinking along those lines. SO I amend my post 2012 will be McCain v. Edwards. I still have faith John will win.
Posted by: Michael at September 5, 2004 02:50 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
A while back, probably in Masy or June, just a month or so after Kerry locked up the nomination, I posted a message on this site something to the effect that in tight political campaigns, the key is knowing when to blink. I recall that many of the ppl. posting at that time were in a panic over the supposed lack of aggresive campaigning on the part of Kerry and his delay in choosing a running mate. My point is, presidential elections are not won in Aug. or Sept. This campaign will likely come down to the last 2 weeks of October. Now that Sasso is on-board, the dynamics of this campaign are going to change. Remember this: high expectations from your candidate in August will likely cost you in November. The manner in which Kerry is running this so far reminds me of Orwell's classic, "1984". Just when the the telescreens were declaring Eurasia on the verge of a decisive and final victory over Oceania, when the populace of Oceania were at their lowest point, Oceania pulled out a miraculous victory. My advice to you ppl. is be patient! Again, the key in this race will be to know when to blink. The other side may have pulled the trigger waaaay to quickly!
Posted by: canadian_4_kerry at September 5, 2004 08:19 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment